While the ultimate source is probably the CIA, this is the Jerusalem Post reporting about an upcoming book by an academic historian—so it’s presumably been vetted by a few other parties.
The term "vetted" is doing a lot of heavy work there. "Laundered" would be far more accurate in this context of imperialist invention of reality or consent manufacturing.
All we can say for certain is that a Jerusalem Post reporter and a Harvard historian want us to believe the article’s content. We may believe, independently, that the CIA also want us to believe it—but if the CIA wanted the opposite, we’d still be reading the same article. So the trustworthiness of the article’s content depends on the trustworthiness of the reporter and the historian, not the CIA.